Safe Speed Forums

radio 4 today

Road Signs Reduce Safety

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/repor ... ing3.shtml

_________________
nigel_bytes

Interesting. I think the idea as propounded may be going too far, but a sensible reduction of the ridiculous and confusing plethora of road signs which litter our highways - and even byways - would be a good thing.

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

Because motorists don't what to save lives?

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

Used to be us not so long ago

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

Eh? Since when?

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

Yeah! since when and what a load of Bol££$%Ks

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

what's this? Dissent against the leaders opinion?

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewt ... 260#144260

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

Don't think so...

I agree with Grumpy and Dixie. There's no specific speed at which 'eye contact' becomes possible.

But that doesn't make 'self explaining roads' a bad idea.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

And possibly may encourage drivers to LOOK and THINK for themselves, and not be 'spoon-fed' each and every thing they should/should not do?

IMHO

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Can't see it happening though. Don't want the sheeple to start thinking for themselves on the roads. They might start applying thinking in other areas.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

And thus would be exempt from a job with the LA. Hmmm, I see your point...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

I'm sorry, where does Paul say we can't make eye contact at speeds greater that 20mph?

edited to add:- sorry, bit slow on the draw with this reply – I’ve already been cleared of any dissention.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

It's not so much eye contact per se as a whole lot of non-verbal communication based around eye contact. The 20mph parameter is based on the neuropsychological principle that the human brain is "wired" to be able to interact with other humans in close proximity up to around that speed since it's the top speed of a fit young male out hunting in a group (gathering being done rather more slowly!) and is therefore, if you like, the "maximum design speed" of the MkI Homo Sapiens (there is, of course, the argument put forward by some anthropologists that the current model is actually better referred to as H. Sapiens Sapiens, but that's probably taking things a bit far).

I'll try to find the appropriate references if I get a moment

Whether HomSapSap 2.7 or whatever release we could taken to be now works at the same clock speed is, of course, open to question and experiment!

Hey, that’s interesting stuff – I’m a great believer in communication with eyes only. However, in this instance we aren’t talking about ocular conversation, simply acknowledging each other’s presence. Aren’t we?

I’m still not sure about this 20mph thing. Were we really designed to run at that speed?

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

It's about negotiation and acknowledgement - the communication between the various people in the shared space, pedestrians, drivers, riders etc., so messages pass "After you." "No, after you..." and it becomes more complex with more than two participants.

And yes a fit, young man (so that's me out of the equation!) will be able to run at that sort of speed in short bursts - especially if chasing something he wants to eat or running away from something that wants to eat him - even a four minute mile is a mean speed throughout the run of 15mph and that's rather more than a short burst...

Yeah that was one of the theories that 'proved', 120 years ago, that we needed a red flag act.

I'm perfectly comfortable controlling a vehicle and interacting with others at speeds considerably in excess of 100mph.

So the verdict from this example of Homo Sapiens is 'psychobabble'.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

One thing that I noticed Paul, on my return through Holland from Germany last week was; that their autobahns seem to have ALL gained a 100 km/hr (62 mph) limit since I was last there....

OK, a couple of years ago they had 100 kph sections through urban (city) sections with a return to 130kph outside city limits. But NOW it seems to be a continuous 100kph everywhere! (can anyone confirm?).

Maybe it's supposed to be safer? Oh no it isn't................ I tell you, it causes "bunching". You need eyes in the back and sides of your head to watch everyone around you as they "keep station" just a few inches away.
Lorries think that it's OK to change lanes as you ride beside them because the speed is the same, everyone is "Frightened" to "stand out" by going faster than the rest.
If someone brakes suddenly there are no gaps anymore, no differentiation between lorries and cars which naturally tends to separate them (normally affected by speed differential).

I didn't like it, I didn't like it at all. It was bloody dangerious!......

It's NOT about "safety" Paul, it's NOT about "Global warming" .......... It's about the old American speed restrictions that were applied after the oil scare of 1974. YOU TRAVEL SLOWER AND YOU USE LESS IMPORTED OIL!

Only, Someone DOESN'T want to say so to the western public!

Global warming my ARRrrrrrrrs...........sorry Paul!



P.S. My car reaches it's BEST fuel consumption figures in top gear between 80....130 mph (Jaguar figures)...... and therefore the least CO2/ Km.

It would be a pretty short conversation.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

Yeah!

But joking aside, the real point is that we vary our communications strategies to suit the circumstances

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I think I need to know more about this theory.

If you and I are out hunting, and we are running along side each other at 20mph we can communicate with our eyes. If we both put on a spurt and reach 21mph, we can’t.

Or do you mean…. if you are stationary and watching me do all the work, I can communicate at 20mph and not at 21mph?

I.e. Are we talking relative speeds here or individual speeds?

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished